Some suggestions for RT


Here are some suggestions/wishes I would have for RT in decreasing importance:

  1. Guides not in Crop Tool. Could the guides (grid, etc…) be activated independently from the crop tool? I think this should be accesible either on the top or bottom bar but not within a tool. Ideally the guides could be activated with a hot-key. This would, imho, improve work-flow.

  2. Shiftable Vignette Filter. Example: a face is not perfectly centered, then I would like to place the vignette’s center over the face.

  3. Less color toning methods. Are six toning methods needed? I understand, that RT wants to give options, but as it also has aimed a little lately to get more user friendly I wonder if six options are really needed. Is there anything in any method that is not achievable with other methods?
    My suggestions would be: LAB blending, LAB Grid and Color Correction.

For those who don’t know me, I think RT is awesome, so this is not meant as critique, just some ideas…

(Morgan Hardwood) #2

You’re right, six felt a little empty. Now there are seven.




(Alberto) #4

I think “L*a*b* regions” rules them all :wink:
Seriously, I agree that there is quite a bit of redundancy in there. This is true also for other parts of RT. But it’s difficult to clean up the tool palette without breaking backwards compatibility, which as I understand it is high on RT’s priorities (I mean, not breaking it of course).

(Morgan Hardwood) #5

@agriggio I agree.

Speaking of Lab Regions, why not allow toning shadows and highlights separately with a single line as the Lab Grid allows?

(Alberto) #6

Because although the UI is similar, the underlying implementation is a bit different, and would make it complicated. It’s easier to just use masks for this.


@agriggio, is regions in the dev version?

And what about moving the guides smewhere else? That would seem to me to very helpful.

(Morgan Hardwood) #8✓&q=sort%3Aupdated-desc+guides

(Alberto) #9

Yes, it’s even the default.

Honestly, I’m personally lukewarm about that… but maybe someone else is interested.


Oh ok, it’s on the list!


There are two vignette filters too! The one under “Lens / Geometry” on the “Transform” tab allows to decenter.


I agree to have the guides independent of the crop tool. E.g. for rotating they would be useful.

(Gabriele ) #13

Hi All,
because my main final target is the printer and if one asks me for one thing on a wish list I wish a possibility to alter the printer profile file and intents on the editor window as the monitor profile.


(Andrew) #14

How about when you open a raw and save, RT saves to the same folder as the raw, rather than the last one used? (Unless you use the dialogue to change it of course…) It’s very common of course with any file-edit-save process that it goes to the source folder. I appreciate others may have good reason for keeping as is. So what’s the main “use case” folks?!

Incidentally I find that though I have “last visited directory” set in browser preferences, RT often ignores this. Might be when I’ve booted Ubuntu from cold.

(Morgan Hardwood) #15

The Queue does that by default. The Save Immediately window can do that too - use the source folder bookmark for that:

(Wayne Sutton) #16

One solution to the redundancy issue as well as the growing complexity of the GUI could be to have two modes which could be toggled e.g. a basic and an advanced mode. The debate about what goes where could be an interesting one but I think there could be benefits for new and experienced users alike to have a basic mode that covers 95% of cases in a normal workflow.


I would suggest the following: “Obsolete items” - i.e. items that are better handled by a newer tool - are placed under a tab ‘Compatibility functions’.
If the tab is selected, a text appears in a block above the functions themselves:
“The functions in this tab are legacy functions that have been made redundant by newer versions that are grouped in the other tabs. The legacy functions are provided in case you want edit a file that uses them. You can of course continue to use these functions and they will continue to be supported.”
The functions would still be available and usable. If a file is opened that uses these functions some indication could occur to point the user to the normally unused tab, but this is not necessary.

(Andrew) #18

Suggesting a tweak to the Resize tool to make printing easier.

The print lab I’m using wants the image to fill the chosen paper size at a specified DPI. Therefore I know what pixel dimensions they want for my image. I want to achieve these dimensions when I resize my photo.

However I’ve cropped “artistically” to taste and don’t want to compromise, so there needs to be some white space (or coloured space) along two of the sides. So it would be nice if RT could add these stripes. I.e. a bigger canvas than the actual image. So could the Resize tool have a few more inputs where you say how many pixels to add to each of the four sides (generalising it a bit). And a way to specifiy a colour, which could be white.


Something related… my lab prints the short side of the image along a fixed width, for example 13 or 20 cm. If I want my image to be X wide or Y tall I also have to add borders elsewhere.
I think it would make sense to specify: image size (locked to aspect ratio), physical size (also locked), and canvas size (by default equal to physical size, but values can be increased).
I think no fill color is needed (but it could be useful for people who want to leave the border on).


I wholeheartedly agree with this. It would make learning the software much easier for new users.

Alternatively, have an “express” mode that exposes only the most basic and important functionality for new users, and stick the advanced techniques (e.g. Retinex filters) in an “advanced” mode.

I think “contrast by detail level” is redundant with the wavelet edge enhancement, by the way (as in it is strictly worse).